Queen Elizabeth II Tiaras & Necklaces 1: Nov 2005-Nov 2007


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Aquamarine Tiara

Aquamarines it is then!
HM in her aquamarine parure, the stones being a gift from the Brazilian Government.

pic courtesy Getty Images

c02fbc1f.jpg
 
Thanks Warren. Those gems are beautiful. I like the seafoam color better on HM with white hair though!
 
Not the most flattering pic of her Majesty. That is a huge Parure. The gems are gigantic. It must way a ton.
 
Princejonnhy25 said:
Not the most flattering pic of her Majesty. That is a huge Parure. The gems are gigantic. It must way a ton.

indeed not too flattering. albeit majestic. the gems are a bit TOO huge, imho.

if another princess wears this parure in the future, i suspect she'll have the court jewelers 'downsize' the tiara a little.

the extra jewels could be used nicely to make other pieces.
 
Some scans I made today:
source: The Jewels of Queen Elizabeth II by Leslie Field

President Ayub Khan of Pakistan necklace




King Faisal of Saudi Arabia necklace




King Khalid of Saudi Arabia necklace




Four row choker




Pear drop earrings

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thankyou for great photos.
I see the Queen is wearing ruby necklace, also worn by Queen Mum. Again Crown Property, refer Page 129 ,Susy Menkes book. Quote - The Queen knows that (Mummie willgive back one day).
The day was in Malta.
signed HRH
 
Whay I mean is the Queen Mum retained the ruby jewellery,that is tiara, necklace, earrings. They were crown property, and QEII, actually had first choice, but she allowed her mother their wearing. The quote wasnot typed correctly by me, and should say ( I know Mummie will give them back one day) meaning returning crown property.

signed HRH
 
Thankyou for calrifying joye...

The necklace you see from the State visit to Malta (ruby and diamond) was actually a wedding present to the then Princess Elizabeth off her parents upon her marriage to Philip of Greece & Denmark. It is not part of crown property but a personal item belonging solely to HM the Queen. But, I take it you are talking about this set.

af1c014b.jpg


"MII"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ElisaR said:
I know that pins are used to keep the hat on the head, but I've no idea of HOW they work. :confused:
Perhaps we should open a thread about "hat pins". :D

A hat pin is similar to a tie pin.
On one end you have a motif (A jewel, Ball of gold or something like that) to stop it going all the way through. It goes through the hat, then your hair, (secured by a grip to keep your hair in place), through the hat again and secured by screwing or pushing another 'ball' or jewel mounted 'shape' on the sharp end.:)
I hope this helps explain the mysteries of hat pins!
 
joye said:
Thankyou for great photos.
I see the Queen is wearing ruby necklace, also worn by Queen Mum. Again Crown Property, refer Page 129 ,Susy Menkes book. Quote - The Queen knows that (Mummie willgive back one day).
The day was in Malta.
signed HRH

The Queen's ruby necklace was a gift to her from the Emir of Qatar in 1985.

The ruby parure worn by the Queen Mother was originally set with opals and left to the Crown by Queen Victoria in 1901. Queen Alexandra believed opals bring bad luck and had the parure, along with the Indian tiara, reset with Burmese rubies she and Queen Victoria had received over the years from the Indian princes.
 
joye said:
Whay I mean is the Queen Mum retained the ruby jewellery,that is tiara, necklace, earrings. They were crown property, and QEII, actually had first choice, but she allowed her mother their wearing. The quote wasnot typed correctly by me, and should say ( I know Mummie will give them back one day) meaning returning crown property.

signed HRH

Technically, yes, but obviously the Queen had no intention of asking her mother to return Crown pieces she was actively wearing, although she certainly could have. Queen Mary also retained many jewels considered to be personal property that really belonged to the Crown or were gifted to her in right of it. After her death, the Queen inherited these pieces as part of the Crown Collection.
 
Re The Queen's ruby necklace worn with the Regal Indian Tiara in Malta, all 3 of us are wrong about its history.
Please refer to page 68 Leslie Fields book- quote(acquired this necklace in the early 1960s. Ruby necklace with ornate diamond centrepiece, with 3 oval ruby drops).

The Queen has 2 other ruby neclaces.
1. Floral Bandeau. Wedding gift from her parents. Refer page 140 Leslie Field book. The necklace is described thus: V shaped D & Ruby floral bandeau collar.

2. Swag Necklace. 1985 State Gift from Amir of Qatar. Refer page 138 Leslie Field book again. Described thus: A diamond swag necklace with centrepiece of 2 large rubies.

The ring on her finger may be an oval ruby, set in a cluster of 17 closely set diamonds, with 17 smaller rubies set at intervals round the edge . same paragraph as swag necklace.

If this is the ring it is not worn often, and when she knows she has not to shake many hands. This ring was made at the same time, as aquiring the 3 drop ruby recklace, that is, early 1960s.
signed HRH
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I found this picture of HM wearing the Jordanian Turquoises on her state visit to the Hashemite Kingdom in 1984.
 

Attachments

  • qe2.jpg
    qe2.jpg
    143.6 KB · Views: 4,008
Can't help you with the picture posting part :( but in answer to the sapphires: the Queen has an awesome set called the King George VI parure which has the gems. She also has two brooches, one which was a pre-wedding gift to Victoria from Albert and another bought by Queen Mary from Marie Feodorovna's estate. May also recived a sapphire brooch from Marie as a wedding present and the Queen has worn this piece as well. Princess Margaret wore frequently another tiara with a big sapphire in the middle that I believe was left to the Queen Mother by Queen Mary which was another item that had belonged to Marie (who like a lot of the Romanovs pre-Revolution had a staggering jewelry collection.) Not sure but I seem to recall Queen Elizabeth II had a sapphire bracelet in her younger years.
 
Questions Answered

Hey Guys, ive just finished watching 'The Queen by Rolf' on BBC1 where Rolf Harris paints Her Majesty The Queen for her 80th birthday and films the whole thing with the Queen, she says she dislikes wearing 'large jewellery' unless she has to for large occasions. Rolf continues to ask the Queen if the Jewels still exsist and havent been altered she then says that most of the Royal jewels are still in the vaults. she continues to speak about her grandmother and her famous likeness for jewels, and says when she was young and recieved her first tiara which her grandmother which was the girls of great britian and ireland and that after the death of her grandmother the Queen found the base of the tiara that she didnt know exsisted when was in her grandmothers jewellery vaults.

nice to know theyre still there:D :D :D :cool:
 
I thought you may enjoy this little video clip of the British documentary
"The Royal jewels" I watched a couple of months ago very interesting!

It followed the history of all the main items of the queen's collection, but what I found most interesting is you can tell by what jewellery (if any) the queen gives to her in laws can give a hint to how she feels about them.

She give next to nothing to poor sarah which has to say something in comparsion to diana in which she give the full use of the Queen mary tiara. I dont know much about the Queen's collection but this documentary was very good

Any way enjoy!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think it is so much how she feels about them as forward thinking about where the collection is going. IMTS, Sarah's daughters will more than likely marry commoners and in future generations the pieces would finish up on the open market whereas Diana's children will be the cornerstone of the 21st century monarchy and the jewels their wives wear will remain within the royal family. I think you will see in future generations that Harry's children would get less than Williams for the same reason.
When you consider that the Gloucesters are currently selling off the family silver to pay death duties it is a very real issue and must be at the forefront of decisions the Queen makes regarding jewels. Appearances suggest that the jewels Sophie has received have come from Prince Phillips family which makes me wonder if Princess Andrew actually left them to Prince Edward.
 
Last edited:
wymanda said:
Appearances suggest that the jewels Sophie has received have come from Prince Phillips family which makes me wonder if Princess Andrew actually left them to Prince Edward.

Princess Andrew didn't have any worldly possessions left when she died. Her jewels (of which she had few in any case) were all reset for Princess Elizabeth when she married Prince Philip (the Queen's diamond bracelet and her engagement ring) and her remaining tiara was given to HM as a wedding gift. The Queen never wore it and gave it to Princess Anne in 1972.

All of Sophie's jewels are new, with the exception of the Scroll Diamond Tiara, which supposedly was given to her by the Queen after the birth of Louise, but we haven't seen her wear it yet.
 
Dane said:
hey,

As Many Monarchs have given jewels to the crown in their will for future royals, do you think that Her majesty The Queen will also do this, i hope so as i hope i never have to see her two Romanov tiaras, the Kokoshnik tiara and the Grand Duchess Vladimirs tiara on anyone else but a Windsor.

All of these tiaras were left to the Crown by Queen Mary to be worn by future Queens in right of it, along with the Girls of Great Britain and Ireland Tiara. The Queen will not lend or gift them to anyone.

The Queen has several tiaras that are her personal property including the Delhi Durbar, Lover's Knot, Boucheron Diamond Honeycomb, Sapphire & Diamonds, Rubies & Diamonds. All of these were either personal bequests to her mother or designed using stones that belonged or were purchased by the Queen personally. Diana had the use of the Lover's Knot Tiara and Camilla is using the Delhi Durbar Tiara.

The Brazilian Aquamarine Parure, including the tiara, was a Coronation gift to the Queen and is considered to be part of the Crown's Collection.
 
Tiara pics!

branchg said:
Princess Andrew didn't have any worldly possessions left when she died. Her jewels (of which she had few in any case) were all reset for Princess Elizabeth when she married Prince Philip (the Queen's diamond bracelet and her engagement ring) and her remaining tiara was given to HM as a wedding gift. The Queen never wore it and gave it to Princess Anne in 1972.

All of Sophie's jewels are new, with the exception of the Scroll Diamond Tiara, which supposedly was given to her by the Queen after the birth of Louise, but we haven't seen her wear it yet.
Hi branchq, there was some speculation that the tiara Sophie wore to one of the functions for the F & M wedding in 2004 was part of Princess Andrew's 'Battenberg Diamond and Aquamarine' tiara.

Regarding the Diamond Scroll Tiara, are you referring to this one, once worn by Princess Margaret? An elegant piece which would look lovely on Sophie, but then I wouldn't be surprised if there was another scroll tiara! :)

pics: Sophie courtesy Polfoto; Margaret courtesy Corbis.

Countess of Wessex: unidentified Tiara

0494d6f6.jpg


Princess Margaret: Queen Mother's Diamond Scroll Tiara
(and 3 Royal Family Orders)

60b48448.jpg
 
I think the aquamarine and diamond tiara worn by Princess Andrew was part of a parure that was a wedding gift from the Tsar. It disappeared, so we can probably assume it was sold when she lived in St. Cloud and money was very tight.

Sophie's tiara at Crown Prince Frederk's wedding looks like a necklace set on a frame, so I'm not sure where it came from.
 
wymanda said:
Is it possible that this is the basis for Sophies new tiara with the large aquamarine from Princess Andrews tiara forming the centre?

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=110939&d=1110972771

I guess it's possible wymanda. There's definitly a strong simularity between the designs.

This was a present from either the people of Australia or South Australia solely (can't quite remember) to Her Majesty the Queen Elizabeth II. I have never liked Opal (I think it's horrid) so I can understand why it has never been worn more than once (possibly twice ?)

Such a shame because if it didn't have the opal it would be a gorgeous piece (the lay out of the diamonds is superb). An emerlad or aquamarine would look fab as its replacement...not one that big of course...

I think it would make a gorgeous tiara.

"MII"
 
Last edited:
All of these tiaras were left to the Crown by Queen Mary to be worn by future Queens in right of it, along with the Girls of Great Britain and Ireland Tiara. The Queen will not lend or gift them to anyone.

According to Leslie Fields' book, Queen Mary didn't leave any significant jewels in this way; most of them were left by Queen Victoria. Where did you find this information?
 
Elspeth said:
According to Leslie Fields' book, Queen Mary didn't leave any significant jewels in this way; most of them were left by Queen Victoria.
Yes, according to Suzy Menkes in "The Royal Jewels" Queen Mary left very little to the Crown. She lists the few items as:
  • 3 Indian armlets, an Indian necklace, an Indian ruby [necklace] snap, (given to the Crown 1912-1926);
  • 17 historic rings, 5 rings containing locks of hair, ("sent to Windsor Castle" 1910);
  • sapphire ring given to Queen Victoria by her mother, (added to the regalia in the Tower of London 1919).
That's it! Nothing appears to have been given to the Crown by Queen Mary since 1926.
 
Margrethe II said:
This was a present from either the people of Australia or South Australia solely (can't quite remember) to Her Majesty the Queen Elizabeth II. I have never liked Opal (I think it's horrid) so I can understand why it has never been worn more than once (possibly twice ?) "MII"

QMII, that piece of opal is seriously valuable &, IMO, the colours are gorgeous! Perhaps HM should have the opal set in a brooch with just a simple platinum setting. Imagine how gorgeous it would look on an aquamarine gown. What do you think?
 
wymanda said:
QMII, that piece of opal is seriously valuable &, IMO, the colours are gorgeous! Perhaps HM should have the opal set in a brooch with just a simple platinum setting. Imagine how gorgeous it would look on an aquamarine gown. What do you think?
Oh definitly wymanda :) The opal would be of great value (the opal from the Queen's necklace and earings is from Coober Pedy I do believe, which is the opal capital of the world) it's just that I have never been fond of opal ;).lol....also, HM the Queen has never taken a liking to it either.

I do however agree that opal set against an aquamarine gown would look so very impressive.

"MII"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Elspeth said:
According to Leslie Fields' book, Queen Mary didn't leave any significant jewels in this way; most of them were left by Queen Victoria. Where did you find this information?

Leslie Fields notes in her book that Queen Mary's bequests to The Queen included a schedule of jewels that were to be restricted to the Crown and worn by a queen or queen consort in right of it (presumbly after the death of The Queen herself).
 
Quote:
Originally posted by micas@Feb 17th, 2004 - 6:54 am
Some1 now what tiara is this???????????????

http://worldroots.com/brigitte/gifs/...lizabeth57.jpg

Sorry the pic are in bad condition :blush: :blush: :blush:
The Queen wears the Hyderabad diamond tiara. She received this tiara from the Nizam of Hyderabad (the richest of India's many Princes) for her wedding in 1947.

The tiara was later broken up - some of the flower motifs are now worn as brooches - the rest of the tiara was apparently usesd to make the Burmese ruby tiara (together with the rubies from Burma).

Attached is a close up of what the tiara used to look like before it was broken up.

Nizam%20Tiara.jpg
 
The Nizam survives?

Kitase said:
The Queen wears the Hyderabad tiara. She received this tiara from the Nizam of Hyderabad (the richest of India's many Princes) for her wedding in 1947.
The tiara was later broken up - some of the flower motifs are now worn as brooches - the rest of the tiara was apparently used to make the Burmese ruby tiara (together with the rubies from Burma).
There is uncertainty as to the fate of the Nizam. While some writers (eg Suzy Menkes) suggest the tiara has been broken up, others such as Geoffrey Munn in his magnum opus "Tiaras A History of Splendour" confidently state it hasn't. Munn also gives the sources of the stones for the Burmese Ruby Tiara. Others have suggested it is unlikely such a serious wedding gift would be destroyed. Take your pick :). It's all speculation; we don't know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom